I can see that if this was an album done 10 or 15 years ago we could see we were moving on to some place else.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It's trippy to think we have an album that's 10 years old. It's even trippier to think we have a couple of albums older than that.
I think we could have done a lot more great music, so I was disappointed that we didn't continue making records and touring, but it's hard to argue with 10 good years.
I always felt if we were going in to do an album, there should already be a lot of structure already made up so we could get on with that and see what else happened.
Every album that I've attempted, I suppose, has been different - it's bound to be.
I'm sure if we had made an album that was more traditional would have been released immediately. When we actually play this music on stage and people become familiar with it, it will become more popular.
Songs really are like a form of time travel because they really have moved forward in a bubble. Everyone who's connected with it, the studio's gone, the musicians are gone, and the only thing that's left is this recording which was only about a three-minute period maybe 70 years ago.
If you're only making an album every 10 years, it better be good.
One Long Year was just a song here and there, and it was meant to reflect the mood that I was in but unfortunately it also reflected too little of any particular thing rather than hanging together as a whole album.
We've been working on a new album, which is going to come out next spring, which is very different, a change of style for us - it's going to be almost like rock music.
I guess when we were up against it, we knew this album was going to be compared to all the classic early material, because it was going back to the original five.
No opposing quotes found.